skippydiesel

Check out the (comprehensive) visiting pilot instructions for the Vintage Aircraft Fly-In, Corowa. https://antique-aeroplane.com.au/event-5658328#:~:text=COROWA%2C NSW 18-21 APRIL,days of fun and celebrations. This is how it should be done

My question was not about the suitability/quality of the contain but the amount of fuel that may be carried - in practical terms, seems it is up to the purchaser (as it should be)

I did specify HOBBY farm - unless exceptionally large, verging on commercial, I doubt the viability of your statement.

I see this is a "Standard" - Does this mean that it is enforceable/recommended (?) across all Australian jurisdictions ? Does it apply to both commercial/private situations ? How can it be applied to small business/hobby farmers, who will routinely need much more than 25 L at a time? Is it an other one of those rules/legislation (like ASIC) that has no foundation in logic, is unenforceable and completely impractical?

Developers just take advantage of whatever situations arise (bit like Vultures eating the dead) - the real fault is with the Government(s) of the day, making short term decisions (about public assets/facilities) for short term financial gain and bugger the long-term consequences.

The sort of fuel bladder you want should be dictated by its use. The Turtle pack options are great as ferry/range extending tanks. For the most part connected to the aircrafts existing fuel reticulation system. If you are looking for some way to transport fuel (ULP) to your aircraft, from a servo, while on an away trip, foldable "Jerrys" might be a more cost effective option. This is what I use, as space in my aircraft is limited. To date I have never used them to carry fuel in the aircraft. They are available from reputable suppliers like Aircraft Spruce (AU)

"That would be what I would expect to see;" - Agreed "inevitably people will go on social media and others will tell them they put "x" oil in their Rotax and its still going, they'll do the same, wreck the engine and trash talk it for the rest of their lives. You can't help some people." - Can I assume you have heard of experimental/homebuilt/kit aircraft. If so which part of experimental do you not comprehend? While factory built aircraft may limit a pilot/owners choice of materials, experimental does not. Those that choose to go the experimental rout do so, at least in part, because they have the freedom to exercise choice, their own intelligence & reasoning. Your dogmatic fear mongering is an insult to those who enjoy the challenge of making their own purchasing decisions and a failure to recognise that, historically, the market will almost always provide competitive products, that will meet exceed the specifications published by the manufacturer. At the moment there is is at least one motorcycle oil that meets/exceeds all of the Rotax XPS oil specification, save one, lead scavenging. The lead scavenging component is of no interest to someone who uses ULP (lead free) exclusively (or almost so). In my mind it is not a question of suitability but of cost effectiveness - will the non Rotax oil be significantly cheaper and therefor worth the risk. For Rotax 9 users who do not use AvGas - Passed on from the Rotax Owners Forum : "Use either Mobile One Racing 4T or AmsOil Motorcycle oil. Both full synthetic motorcycle oils with ZDDP additive in them.." Available in Australia: Mobile 1 Racing 4T about $23/L https://www.m1oils.com.au/product/motorcycle-racing-4t-10w-40/ AmsOil Motorcycle oil about $35/L (sold in imperial quantities)

Out of idle interest - what jurisdiction (State) does your statement refer to??

Speculation: There is a recent tendency to quote/estimate on mid to top range fit out ie not the base model, which likely would have "steam gauges", manual trim/flaps, no autopilot, no fancy paint job, no fuel injection, no constant speed prop. Likely lower empty weight and aircraft probably flies as well/better than the one with all the "bling". The other big factor is the currency exchange rate - the Australian dollar has dropped from around 80 cents to the US $, to a fairly constant 65 cents/US$ and 60 cents to the Euro - this makes purchasing from the US and Europe (where most of our small aircraft come from) a very costly transaction. If some of these manufactures set up shop in Australia, they mighty just do very well (& us to)

Nill/Very light wind. 22 was the best runway (for all but STOL aircraft) subject to wind direction. About 100 m before it terminated (04 end), the exit taxiway lead to the aircraft parking area.

Did the Parkes thing yesterday. Arrived about 11:30 ish. I started listening to YPKs at about 20 Nm out and was astonished at the confusion ref the ACTIVE runway. While its the PIC's prerogative to land on whichever runaway he/she deems appropriate, it is customary/considerate of others, to fit in with traffic already in the circuit. Runway 22/04 seemed in favour, with pilots (I think there were 3-4 involved) declaring for both within seconds of each other. It all worked out okay in the end, with all opting for 22. Unsure of the legalities however I feel that the RAA's decision not to provide some sort of ground to air guidance to arriving aircraft lead to unnecessary confusion (reduced safety).

Did the Parkes thing yesterday. Arrived about 11:30 ish. I started listening to YPKs at about 20 Nm out and was astonished at the confusion ref the ACTIVE runway. While its the PIC's prerogative to land on whichever runaway he/she deems appropriate, it is customary/considerate of others, to fit in with traffic already in the circuit. Runway 22/04 seemed in favour, with pilots (I think there were 3-4 involved) declaring for both within seconds of each other. It all worked out okay in the end, with all opting for 22.

What has happened to affordable aviating ???? - crazy purchase prices and thirsty engines.

No worse than Sydney Basin (may be better) and many other locations.

"Parkes Sling porn;" Very sexy looking BUT GA not RAA and a 4 seater to boot. Better that you took a photo of the ATEC Faeta that would have been just behind your photo position.

One of the items on my "bucket list" is flying to Perth from NSW . Yet to do for real however have done the virtual trip, courtesy of OzRunways, by several routes. Each time I do this exercise (real duration/range) I also research the various landing points for ULP & accommodation - seems eminently doable to me. Will carry my 2 x 20L fuel bladders (& my trusty filter funnel) to facilitate fuel from town - may have to make more than one trip, but again with a little forward planning eg contacting flying clubs along the way, it can be done, many have done it before me .

It's been a few years however not long ago aviation products were exempt from import duty. Still had to pay for handling/inspection/ GST/ etc

Quick read through and all I saw was comments about this engine competing with Rotax 912's - seems all have forgotten that Jab engines were very much cheaper than Rotax. Despite the jabs unfortunates reputation, lots of pilots, here & overseas, were/are happy to take the lower cost engine.

True Nev, however I have never seen such a pathetic attempt at safety wiring - must be a jole.

Trying to understand the problem - It's all about duration (time in the air, with a reserve of course). My point is, with the exception of the ultra slow, most Jabs/Rotax powered aircraft, should have sufficient range to get to a fuel source IF you flight plan to do so (this may not be the shortest/direct route)

Ye Gads! - It must be terrifying to be you. How do you get outside your front door, let alone drive/walk on the public thorougfare? My (not yours) reality is that we live in a litigious society (courtesy of the Yanks, whom we so slavishly follow). Seems ever few people, take responsibility for their actions, so look to blame someone else for every misstep, that they or others may make. Urbane scutlbut would have us belive, that we are all in danger of being sued for every sneeze, trip, decision that effects us or others. True or false, I choose to lead my life as a responsible adult, the decision I make are mine and for the most part are with due consideration to the law/regulation, moderated by a big dollop of common sense - I sleep well and my conscience is clear. Contacting the manufacturers of your aircraft, to request a letter of authorisation, for a proposed modification/change (could be change of battery make or a replacement tyre, propeller, etc) is both normal, accepted and if granted, sufficient approval to carry out the mods - this has nothing to do with how its registered, or how it may be used.

Or a 12V pump, that can be powered from the aircraft battery.

You are correct - they are more difficult to pour. Mine have an extra handle to help control the "floppiness" but even so not as easy as a rigid. No diffrent to carry when full of fuel. My 2 x 20L roll up into a space, very roughly, similar to a 10L rigid. They came with securing straps, I guess, for when they are transported full, something I have never done. When deciding between collapsable & rigid, it's not just weight that should be considered but also volume ie space occupied. If you have plenty of space I would recomend rigid but if your aircraft is like mine where space is very limited ,collapsable may be the only way to go. One other point: Leave space for the containers to expand, with altitude/heat or (less desirable) leave the cap slightly open to allow for expanding gas/air to escape.

I will weigh my two collapsible jerry cans/bladders (& my plastic rigid Jerrys) & get back to you however I will be very surprised that there is much difference either way.

Where do you get this stuff from? Modifications to, factory built, aircraft can not be legally performed, without the approval of the factory/manufacturer. Ergo they can be performed with the factory's (letter of) approval. This has nothing whatsoever to do with "engine failures", "common occurrence" or any other unrelated matter. You assumption that in this case "ferry tanks" can only be applied to GA is unfounded. GA is, in Australia, a registration description, not a class of aircraft. There are many GA registered aircraft that can also be registered RAA (& visa versa). Speculation: Aircraft that have flown around the World, UK/Australia , flown long distances over water (ferry flights) will have been fitted with duration/range extending ferry tanks - the pilots have not ended up in jail.